Others say...

"Enjoyable, but disappointing"
First of all, I bought this thinking that it was the Sid Meier game that I was advised to buy. Not enough due diligence on my part. I have to give this thing some stars because I have spent so much time playing it. I am new to the genre, so perhaps my standards are low (my only previous strategy PC game experience is first generation Axis & Allies); but I enjoy the challenge (the AI is good enough to keep you on your toes) and the simplicity. Learning curve on this one is not steep. I anticipate that my young son will enjoy playing 2-player on this with me (history buff). Perhaps when I encounter other games (like the reviewers seems to know about), this one will get dusty. It probably isn't the best at this price-point, but I've enjoyed it.

"Not Great But Not Bad"
This wargame recreates the famous American Civil War Battle of Gettysburg. It's not an realtime strategy clickfest. You give orders to your units, press the end button and watch your units and those of the enemy carry out their orders simultaneously. It's not as complex as some wargames but it does require knowledge of the strengths and weaknesses of the various units and careful planning. The unit graphics are okay, but the animations look choppier the closer you get to the action. The map is nicely rendered. This isn't a game I'd play for hours on end, but for a quick wargame experience, it's not bad.

"Sucker!"
I was sucked in as this was billed as a Talonsoft game which Take Two bought a couple of years ago. Talonsoft had a very good game in their Battleground series that had all of the things that another reviewer was looking for (some semblance of history!). I was very, very disappointed, thinking that Talonsoft had been resurrected and the Battleground game improved but found this in its stead. I enjoyed the Battleground Civil War games (Gettysburg, Shiloh, Bull Run, and Chickamauga). Outside of the title, this game bears no resemblance to those games. Talonsoft's tactical games (East Front 2, West Front, Rising Sun and Divided Ground) were excellent, but they are not even supported anymore on the Web. Definitely a waste of my money.

"slow"
game is a slow one. I think that it is not worth the cost. shuld be more like 10 dolars. not that much fun. needs more action.

"Why doesn't Amazon allow for zero stars?"
Abysmal. You have to think that the reason the demo is limited to sixty minutes of play is a weak attempt to prevent potential customers from discovering just how poorly designed this thing (it doesn't deserve to be called a game) truly is. The units bear no relation to historical formations. Instead of the 1st Minnesota, 26th North Carolina or 6th Wisconsin you are presented with "unit of artillery" or "half unit of infantry." It would be difficult to imagine a worse game device for an historical simulation than allocating a budget of a set number of dollars, from which the player purchases the units to be involved in a given battle. Once purchased, the units are scattered, apparently at random, on a map loosely suggestive of the actual terrain. There does not appear to be any means to place units in any configuration suggestive of their actual historical positions. Gee, I dunno, I hate to tell game developers their business, but you think maybe it would be a desirable feature in a Gettysburg simulation to be able to position Colonel Chamberlain and the 20th Maine actually on a landscape suggesting Little Round Top? That's enough of your time and mine wasted on this piece of trash.